Search Results

Search found 41848 results on 1674 pages for 'type signature'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 101/1674 | < Previous Page | 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108  | Next Page >

  • MVC actionlink posting List of complex type

    - by Ying
    I have an actionlink that on click im passing a List of objects to a controller action. Example: View: Html.ActionLink("TestLink", "TestMethod", "Test", Model.SampleList, null) TestController: public ActionResult TestMethod(List sampleList) { return View(sampleList); } When I do this I get a null sampleList. I can pass a single complex object fine just not a collection of it. Do I need the correct routing for this? The reason I'm doing this is instead of passing an id and do a look up in the controller action, I just pass in the data.

    Read the article

  • C# Extend array type to overload operators

    - by Episodex
    I'd like to create my own class extending array of ints. Is that possible? What I need is array of ints that can be added by "+" operator to another array (each element added to each), and compared by "==", so it could (hopefully) be used as a key in dictionary. The thing is I don't want to implement whole IList interface to my new class, but only add those two operators to existing array class. I'm trying to do something like this: class MyArray : Array<int> But it's not working that way obviously ;). Sorry if I'm unclear but I'm searching solution for hours now... UPDATE: I tried something like this: class Zmienne : IEquatable<Zmienne> { public int[] x; public Zmienne(int ilosc) { x = new int[ilosc]; } public override bool Equals(object obj) { if (obj == null || GetType() != obj.GetType()) { return false; } return base.Equals((Zmienne)obj); } public bool Equals(Zmienne drugie) { if (x.Length != drugie.x.Length) return false; else { for (int i = 0; i < x.Length; i++) { if (x[i] != drugie.x[i]) return false; } } return true; } public override int GetHashCode() { int hash = x[0].GetHashCode(); for (int i = 1; i < x.Length; i++) hash = hash ^ x[i].GetHashCode(); return hash; } } Then use it like this: Zmienne tab1 = new Zmienne(2); Zmienne tab2 = new Zmienne(2); tab1.x[0] = 1; tab1.x[1] = 1; tab2.x[0] = 1; tab2.x[1] = 1; if (tab1 == tab2) Console.WriteLine("Works!"); And no effect. I'm not good with interfaces and overriding methods unfortunately :(. As for reason I'm trying to do it. I have some equations like: x1 + x2 = 0.45 x1 + x4 = 0.2 x2 + x4 = 0.11 There are a lot more of them, and I need to for example add first equation to second and search all others to find out if there is any that matches the combination of x'es resulting in that adding. Maybe I'm going in totally wrong direction?

    Read the article

  • Address component type in google maps geocoding

    - by user552828
    this is a part of my geocoding code. I want it to show only country of the selected place, but it shows all address components, My problem is I cant specify the address components object. There is a way of doing it that is written on documentation but I didnt understand, can you do it for me. if (geocoder) { geocoder.geocode({'latLng': latlng}, function(results, status) { if (status == google.maps.GeocoderStatus.OK) { var str = ""; $.each(results, function(){ str += "address components: <ul>" $.each(this.address_components, function(){ str +="<li>"+this.types.join(", ")+": "+this.long_name+"</li>"; }); str +="</ul>"; }); $("#geocode_info").html(str);

    Read the article

  • GWT : Type of Container

    - by moorsu
    I see that there are two ways of transferring objects from server to client Use the same domain object (Contact.java) as used in the service layer. (I do not use hibernate) Use the HashMap to send the domain object field values in the form of Map with the help of BeanUtilsBean class. For multiple objects, use the List. Similary, use the Map to submit form values from client to server Is there any performance advantage for option 1 over 2?. Is there a way to hide the classname/package name that is sent to the browser if we use option 1?. thanks!.

    Read the article

  • What is this particular type of revelation called?

    - by Lars Haugseth
    After struggling with a particular problem or bug in some part of my code for hours, without getting anywhere, I often get a sudden revelation as soon as I try to explain the problem to one of my coworkers, or while formulating it in writing for posting to some forum. Does this kind of experience have a name? Where can I read more about it and how to train it? Do any of you use this consciously in your day-to-day work?

    Read the article

  • Using FindAll on a List<List<T>> type

    - by Ken Foster
    Assuming public class MyClass { public int ID {get; set; } public string Name {get; set; } } and List<MyClass> classList = //populate with MyClass instances of various IDs I can do List<MyClass> result = classList.FindAll(class => class.ID == 123); and that will give me a list of just classes with ID = 123. Works great, looks elegant. Now, if I had List<List<MyClass>> listOfClassLists = //populate with Lists of MyClass instances How do I get a filtered list where the lists themselves are filtered. I tried List<List<MyClass>> result = listOfClassLists.FindAll (list => list.FindAll(class => class.ID == 123).Count > 0); it looks elegant, but doesn't work. It only includes Lists of classes where at least one class has an ID of 123, but it includes ALL MyClass instances in that list, not just the ones that match. I ended up having to do List<List<MyClass>> result = Results(listOfClassLists, 123); private List<List<MyClass>> Results(List<List<MyClass>> myListOfLists, int id) { List<List<MyClass>> results = new List<List<MyClass>>(); foreach (List<MyClass> myClassList in myListOfLists) { List<MyClass> subList = myClassList.FindAll(myClass => myClass.ID == id); if (subList.Count > 0) results.Add(subList); } return results; } which gets the job done, but isn't that elegant. Just looking for better ways to do a FindAll on a List of Lists. Ken

    Read the article

  • StructureMap: Wiring (generic) implementations to an implementation of another type

    - by Jeremy Frey
    If I have an interface: public interface IRepository<T> And an abstract class: public abstract class LinqToSqlRepository<T, TContext> : IRepository<T> where T : class where TContext : DataContext And a whole bunch of implementations of IRepository / LinqToSqlRepository (e.g. AccountRepository, ContactRepository, etc.), what's the best way to to use StructureMap (2.5.3) to generically wire them all up? e.g., I want this code to pass: [Test] public void ShouldWireUpAccountRepositories { var accountRepo = ObjectFactory.GetInstance<IRepository<Account>>(); Assert.IsInstanceOf<AccountRepository>(accountRepo); } Without explicitly writing this: ObjectFactory.Configure(x => x.ForRequestedType<IRepository<Account>>() .TheDefaultIsConcreteType<AccountRepository>()); In the past, we've always created a specific interface on each repository that inherited from the generic one, and used the default scanner to automatically wire all of those instances, but I'd like to be able to ask specifically for an IRepository<Account> without cluttering up the project with additional interfaces / configurations.

    Read the article

  • type of an array

    - by Tim
    Hi, when I need to pass an array to a function, it seems all the following declarations of the function will work void f(int arr[]) void f(int arr[4]) // is this one correct? for this: int a[]={1,2,3,4}; f(a); But when I assign an array to another array, it fails int a[]={1,2,3,4}; int b[4] = a; // error: array must be initialized with a brace-enclosed initializer So why an array passed as an argument of a function is okay, but used on the rhs of simple assignment is wrong? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Mixed Table Type with other types as parameters to Stored Procedured c#

    - by amemak
    Hi, I am asking about how could i pass multi parameters to a stored procedure, one of these parameters is user defined table. When I tried to do it it shows this error: INSERT INTO BD (ID, VALUE, BID) values( (SELECT t1.ID, t1.Value FROM @Table AS t1),someintvalue) here @Table is the user defined table parameter. Msg 116, Level 16, State 1, Procedure UpdateBD, Line 12 Only one expression can be specified in the select list when the subquery is not introduced with EXISTS. Msg 109, Level 15, State 1, Procedure UpdateBD, Line 11 There are more columns in the INSERT statement than values specified in the VALUES clause. The number of values in the VALUES clause must match the number of columns specified in the INSERT statement. Thank you

    Read the article

  • Databinding to type double - decimal mark lost

    - by user1277327
    I have a project where I'm databinding a gridview to a list, where one column is databound to a gridview. The problem I have is that with the double being 5.5 on one computer it appears as 5.5 in the gridview. But on another it looks like 55, the decimal mark dissapears. So 3.14 will look like 314 etc. The error occurs with the following code: myDatagrid.ItemsSource = someList; Binding binding = new Binding("DoubleValue"); myColumnInDatagrid.Binding = binding; I've also tried using a very simple valueconverter, that just return the double, and parsed it in ConvertBack. I'm pretty new to WPF so I'm sorry if I've made some obvious mistakes, I just don't understand why it works on one computer but not on the other. Perhaps it should be noted that both of the computers use the same operating system, with the same language settings (afaik at least).

    Read the article

  • Check request type in Django

    - by Art
    While it is recommended to use the following construct to check whether request is POST, if request.method == 'POST': pass It is likely that people will find if request.POST: pass to be more elegant and concise. Are there any reasons not to use it, apart from personal preference?

    Read the article

  • Why .NET Boolean has TrueLiteral and TrueString?

    - by user309937
    Why in Boolean type there are two fields with the same value? internal const int True = 1; internal const int False = 0; internal const string TrueLiteral = "True"; internal const string FalseLiteral = "False"; and public static readonly string TrueString; public static readonly string FalseString; static Boolean() { TrueString = "True"; FalseString = "False"; } in reflector generated code, methods don't use those strings but: public string ToString(IFormatProvider provider) { if (!this) { return "False"; } return "True"; } would't it be better to use those const values?

    Read the article

  • iPhone init method return type

    - by William Jockusch
    Suppose we are writing a class (let's call it Class) in an iPhone program. In all the samples out there, the init methods are typically declared like this: -(id) initWithFoo: (Foo *) foo My question is: would it be more logical to do the following? Why or why not? -(Class *) initWithFoo: (Foo *) foo

    Read the article

  • Name of several objects that have the same type

    - by Tomek Tarczynski
    Lets assume we have a class car. How would You name parameters of function that takes two different cars? void Race(Car first, Car second); or maybe void Race(Car car1, Car car2); The same situation with function that takes car and list of cars as a parameters. I'm used to name 'cars' for list of cars, so it is inconvenient to use names like: void Race(Car car, List<Car> cars); Any suggestions about names?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108  | Next Page >